They ended on 263 for five and Langley never threatened to reach that target.

Kings were all out for 134 in the 35th over with only Richard Whitlock (28) and Scott Rolfe (23) scoring any significant totals.

Andy Price, Neil Dudley and Richard Crowther all claimed two wickets for Boxmoor.

Abbots Langley Seconds remain in mid-table after they played out a dour draw with Old Finchleians Seconds.

Abbots’ bowlers struggled with their line and length in the heat as Finchleians amassed 226 for eight. Only pace bowler Dan Roche achieved any satisfaction, taking five for 50.

Abbots’ batsmen found things difficult in their reply. Mark Bishop (36) and Dave Carlisle (31) were the main run makers in a disappointing reply of 174 for six. Tom Carson (21 not out) and Nick Gurney (20 not out) played out the draw.

Division Eight

A young Hemel Hempstead Fourths side were crushed by Bayford and Hertford Seconds, losing by ten wickets.

Langley scored a modest 190 all out with Tom Templton (31) and Minesh Patel (30) the main contributors to that total.

The bowling of Mark Walker proved crucial for Kings as he claimed five for 33 to skittle Green for 168.

A ruthless bowling display from Abbots Langley Thirds helped them to an easy 101-run victory against Sandridge Seconds.

Batting first, Abotts got off to a slow start and had only 25 on the board with 16 overs gone. They looked in trouble as they slumped to 102 for five but a gritty 59 not out from Gary Hyams and a quick-fire 31 from Lee Rossiter saw Langley to a final total of 175 for nine declared.

In reply, Sandridge had no answer to the Abbots attack. Rossiter impressed with four for 17, Anish Khiroya snared two for 22 and Neel Patel claimed two for nine as the trio tore through the Sandridge batting order to skittle their opponents for just 74.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here